Romney's Bain Lie

[GuyPinestra]

Romney was listed as the CEO but that doesn't mean he was actively involved. That may sound weird to people, but in financial industry general partnerships, that's not uncommon. Founders often receive compensation long after they've either left or are at the firm but aren't doing much productive. In limited liability corporations, people receive stock they hold on to and can sell at later times. In general partnerships in the financial industry, they usually don't.

My guess why he is reluctant to release his tax returns is because it will show that he used offshore tax structures to avoid - legally - paying taxes, maybe some that the IRS has since ruled against. The IRS used to allow carried interest held offshore to be deferred until brought onshore. They disallowed that in the mid-OOs. He probably also had some tax swaps which deferred paying taxes which he no longer uses. All that stuff used to be common.

Well, gee, so you support a guy who doesn't want to let the little people know how he gamed the system to not pay his fair share while they struggle to make ends meet.

This is the guy you support, someone who isn't being honest with us, pretty much.

(Waiting for Toro's usual whine about Mormons and hate.)

I got a couple questions, Joe....

1.) How the hell is obeying the law 'gaming the system'?

2.) Can you define 'fair share' for me?

3.) What part of all of this is 'dishonest'?

 

[Ravi]

Why shouldn't he take advantage of tax breaks? Most people do. Saying he shouldn't take advantage of tax breaks that is readily available to him is about as nonsensical as conservatives saying that if liberals want to raise taxes, they should voluntarily send money to the Treasury and not force everyone to pay. Same coin, different sides.

You realize that his tax return is irrelevant to determining his involvement in Bain, right? He would continue to receive partnership distributions from carried interest from past funds and profits from the management company whether or not he was actively involved. This was investigated when he ran for governor in MA. This whole "Was he running Bain" garbage reminds me of the birfers demanding to see Obama's birth certificate years after it was certified.

If it doesn't matter, why is Mitt reluctant to release his tax returns?

From what I understand, he wasn't just getting distributions, he was being paid a salary of $100,000 a year. While he "wasn't there" doing anything to earn a salary.

When he ran for governor is when he used his Bain tenure as proof that he really "was there" in MA and therefore qualified to run for governor.

Romney was listed as the CEO but that doesn't mean he was actively involved. That may sound weird to people, but in financial industry general partnerships, that's not uncommon. Founders often receive compensation long after they've either left or are at the firm but aren't doing much productive. In limited liability corporations, people receive stock they hold on to and can sell at later times. In general partnerships in the financial industry, they usually don't.

My guess why he is reluctant to release his tax returns is because it will show that he used offshore tax structures to avoid - legally - paying taxes, maybe some that the IRS has since ruled against. The IRS used to allow carried interest held offshore to be deferred until brought onshore. They disallowed that in the mid-OOs. He probably also had some tax swaps which deferred paying taxes which he no longer uses. All that stuff used to be common.

Dude. You don't own 100% of a company and then just go off and ignore it and not be concerned with the direction it takes or the profits it makes. You just don't.

 

[Too Tall]

If Romney didn't lie, then why did Bain continue to pay him until 2002?

Face it...............you hate it when you're shown to be wrong.

And like I said, your link isn't for shit.

Here is a link using several quotes from left wing sources. And they all agree that Obama and his henchmen and henchwomen are lying sacks of dog squeeze.

This from Factceck.org

We would reassess our judgment should somebody come up with evidence that Romney took part in specific management decisions or had any active role (not just a title) at Bain after he left to head the Olympics. But nothing we’ve seen directly contradicts Romney’s statements — which he has certified as true under pain of federal prosecution — that he “has not had any active role” with Bain or “been involved in the operations” of Bain since then.
And we wish to note, we’re not alone in this judgement. Others include:

Fortune’s Dan Primack — who covers Wall Street “deals and dealmakers” — addressed the Mother Jones reporting in a July 2 article that came to the same conclusion we do. Primack’s more recent reporting we’ve already noted.

The Washington Post‘s Fact Checker, Glenn Kessler, rebutted the Boston Globe story in a July 12 piece. “Just because you are listed as an owner of shares does not mean you have a managerial role,” Kessler writes. We agree.

Before the Globe story broke, the Columbia Journalism Review’s Brendan Nyhan stated: “[T]he specific cases cited by the Obama campaign largely concern actions taken by those companies during a period in which Romney was not making operational decisions at the firm. Journalists must be clear about this distinction.” After the Globe story, CJR’s Greg Marx wrote “there’s less new in the Globe article than the attention it has drawn suggests.”

ABC News’ Devin Dwyer reported July 12, after the Globe‘s story appeared: “Team Obama does not provide any specific evidence to back up claims that Romney was actively managing Bain between 1999 and 2002.”

Update, July 13: The Post’s Kessler awarded three of his “Pinocchios” to the Obama camp’s claim that SEC filings show Romney might be guilty of a felony.

FactCheck.org : Romney’s Bain Years: New Evidence, Same Conclusion

 

[Too Tall]

If it doesn't matter, why is Mitt reluctant to release his tax returns?

From what I understand, he wasn't just getting distributions, he was being paid a salary of $100,000 a year. While he "wasn't there" doing anything to earn a salary.

When he ran for governor is when he used his Bain tenure as proof that he really "was there" in MA and therefore qualified to run for governor.

Romney was listed as the CEO but that doesn't mean he was actively involved. That may sound weird to people, but in financial industry general partnerships, that's not uncommon. Founders often receive compensation long after they've either left or are at the firm but aren't doing much productive. In limited liability corporations, people receive stock they hold on to and can sell at later times. In general partnerships in the financial industry, they usually don't.

My guess why he is reluctant to release his tax returns is because it will show that he used offshore tax structures to avoid - legally - paying taxes, maybe some that the IRS has since ruled against. The IRS used to allow carried interest held offshore to be deferred until brought onshore. They disallowed that in the mid-OOs. He probably also had some tax swaps which deferred paying taxes which he no longer uses. All that stuff used to be common.

Dude. You don't own 100% of a company and then just go off and ignore it and not be concerned with the direction it takes or the profits it makes. You just don't.

That is true. Since Romney was working another job 12 hours a day, 6 days a week in another state FOR FREE, he turned the day to day operation over to a management team. That is what Romney did.

 

[JoeB131]

Romney was listed as the CEO but that doesn't mean he was actively involved. That may sound weird to people, but in financial industry general partnerships, that's not uncommon. Founders often receive compensation long after they've either left or are at the firm but aren't doing much productive. In limited liability corporations, people receive stock they hold on to and can sell at later times. In general partnerships in the financial industry, they usually don't.

My guess why he is reluctant to release his tax returns is because it will show that he used offshore tax structures to avoid - legally - paying taxes, maybe some that the IRS has since ruled against. The IRS used to allow carried interest held offshore to be deferred until brought onshore. They disallowed that in the mid-OOs. He probably also had some tax swaps which deferred paying taxes which he no longer uses. All that stuff used to be common.

Well, gee, so you support a guy who doesn't want to let the little people know how he gamed the system to not pay his fair share while they struggle to make ends meet.

This is the guy you support, someone who isn't being honest with us, pretty much.

(Waiting for Toro's usual whine about Mormons and hate.)

I got a couple questions, Joe....

1.) How the hell is obeying the law 'gaming the system'?

2.) Can you define 'fair share' for me?

3.) What part of all of this is 'dishonest'?

1) Because most of us can't hire accountants to get us down to a 13% rate on our taxes, or park our money in Cayman Island Bank accounts.

2) At least as much as everyone else pays as a percentage, if not more. We have "top marginal rates" for a reason. The rich should pay more. Simple fairness and common sense. Otherwise, you eventually have a concentration of wealth at the top and that never ends well. (See also- France 1789, Russia 1917, Cuba 1959, Iran 1979 for further reference as to why this is really a bad thing.)

3) The "Dishonest Part" is the very fact he's hiding most of it. Honest would be, full disclosure, and if anyone has an issue with it, you should be able to justify it, preferably without sounding like a rich douchebag who thinks he's better than the rest of us.

 

[GuyPinestra]

Well, gee, so you support a guy who doesn't want to let the little people know how he gamed the system to not pay his fair share while they struggle to make ends meet.

This is the guy you support, someone who isn't being honest with us, pretty much.

(Waiting for Toro's usual whine about Mormons and hate.)

I got a couple questions, Joe....

1.) How the hell is obeying the law 'gaming the system'?

2.) Can you define 'fair share' for me?

3.) What part of all of this is 'dishonest'?

1) Because most of us can't hire accountants to get us down to a 13% rate on our taxes, or park our money in Cayman Island Bank accounts.

2) At least as much as everyone else pays as a percentage, if not more. We have "top marginal rates" for a reason. The rich should pay more. Simple fairness and common sense. Otherwise, you eventually have a concentration of wealth at the top and that never ends well. (See also- France 1789, Russia 1917, Cuba 1959, Iran 1979 for further reference as to why this is really a bad thing.)

3) The "Dishonest Part" is the very fact he's hiding most of it. Honest would be, full disclosure, and if anyone has an issue with it, you should be able to justify it, preferably without sounding like a rich douchebag who thinks he's better than the rest of us.

1.) The 13.9% rate is on investment income, not wages, and you most certainly CAN hire accountants if you like. To change that we need to change the tax law. And you can certainly park your money in the Cayman Islands, there is nothing stopping you or anyone else from doing just that.

2.) I agree, everyone should pay the same percentage across the board. We could just throw out the 70K pages of tax code and charge EVERYBODY 15%, no deductions, no loopholes. You game?

3.) If he was hiding it Joe, NOBODY would know about it. He disclosed what was required to the FEC, he's filed his taxes and paid what the law requires. I don't think he can help sounding like a rich douchebag, but I don't think that's illegal, YET...

 

[Contumacious]

It's not called "Out Sourcing" if Mitt does it. It's called "Charitable Overseas Employment".?

"As our economy becomes less competitive due to higher taxes, burdensome and uncertain regulations, and capital flight, more manufacturing and services will be outsourced to foreign firms."

.

 

[Article 15]

Mitt Romney handed 23 years of tax returns over to the McCain campaign when they vetted him for a spot on that ticket.

 

[JoeB131]

[

1.) The 13.9% rate is on investment income, not wages, and you most certainly CAN hire accountants if you like. To change that we need to change the tax law. And you can certainly park your money in the Cayman Islands, there is nothing stopping you or anyone else from doing just that.

2.) I agree, everyone should pay the same percentage across the board. We could just throw out the 70K pages of tax code and charge EVERYBODY 15%, no deductions, no loopholes. You game?

3.) If he was hiding it Joe, NOBODY would know about it. He disclosed what was required to the FEC, he's filed his taxes and paid what the law requires. I don't think he can help sounding like a rich douchebag, but I don't think that's illegal, YET...

1) Income is income and it should all be taxed at the same rate. the fact that he can hire accountants is gaming the system in a way I can't, because the accountant would cost me more than any savings he could find. That's kind of the point. He's gaming the system. Period.

2) No, everyone should pay THEIR FAIR SHARE. None of his "flat tax" bullshit. We had our greatest prosperity when the Rich paid through the nose for the privilage of being rich. They did okay, and so did the rest of us. We had good roads, good schools, and we expanded economically.

3) No, being a rich douchebag isn't illegal, yet. For the happy day when it is.

 

[Toro]

When you've made your fortune, your company is staffed by talented people, you have political ambitions, and the Olympics are collapsing and the IOC is threatening to pull it from your spiritual home, yes you do.

If it doesn't matter, why is Mitt reluctant to release his tax returns?

From what I understand, he wasn't just getting distributions, he was being paid a salary of $100,000 a year. While he "wasn't there" doing anything to earn a salary.

When he ran for governor is when he used his Bain tenure as proof that he really "was there" in MA and therefore qualified to run for governor.

Romney was listed as the CEO but that doesn't mean he was actively involved. That may sound weird to people, but in financial industry general partnerships, that's not uncommon. Founders often receive compensation long after they've either left or are at the firm but aren't doing much productive. In limited liability corporations, people receive stock they hold on to and can sell at later times. In general partnerships in the financial industry, they usually don't.

My guess why he is reluctant to release his tax returns is because it will show that he used offshore tax structures to avoid - legally - paying taxes, maybe some that the IRS has since ruled against. The IRS used to allow carried interest held offshore to be deferred until brought onshore. They disallowed that in the mid-OOs. He probably also had some tax swaps which deferred paying taxes which he no longer uses. All that stuff used to be common.

Dude. You don't own 100% of a company and then just go off and ignore it and not be concerned with the direction it takes or the profits it makes. You just don't.

 

[Contumacious]

[

1.) The 13.9% rate is on investment income, not wages, and you most certainly CAN hire accountants if you like. To change that we need to change the tax law. And you can certainly park your money in the Cayman Islands, there is nothing stopping you or anyone else from doing just that.

2.) I agree, everyone should pay the same percentage across the board. We could just throw out the 70K pages of tax code and charge EVERYBODY 15%, no deductions, no loopholes. You game?

3.) If he was hiding it Joe, NOBODY would know about it. He disclosed what was required to the FEC, he's filed his taxes and paid what the law requires. I don't think he can help sounding like a rich douchebag, but I don't think that's illegal, YET...

1) Income is income and it should all be taxed at the same rate. the fact that he can hire accountants is gaming the system in a way I can't, because the accountant would cost me more than any savings he could find. That's kind of the point. He's gaming the system. Period.

2) No, everyone should pay THEIR FAIR SHARE. None of his "flat tax" bullshit. We had our greatest prosperity when the Rich paid through the nose for the privilage of being rich. They did okay, and so did the rest of us. We had good roads, good schools, and we expanded economically.

3) No, being a rich douchebag isn't illegal, yet. For the happy day when it is.

Yes, indeed.

Our next civil war is going too be very bloody indeed.

Make sure you carry a sign expressing those sentiments.

.

 

[Old Rocks]

zzzzz zzzzzzzzzz

Now don't you just wish the American public was reacting that way? Demonstrating that Romney was part of the problem in the movement of American Manufacturing offshore is resonating with a great many Americans of all political views.

 

[CandySlice]

I think people need to understand there is a difference between Bain & Co and Bain Capital...this has apparently been the cause of much the confusion...

Founding and early history

Bain Capital was founded in 1984 by Bain & Company partners Mitt Romney, T. Coleman Andrews III, and Eric Kriss. In 1983, Bill Bain offered Romney the chance to head a new venture that would invest in companies and apply Bain's consulting techniques to improve operations.[6]

While Bain Capital was founded by Bain executives, the firm was not an affiliate or a division of Bain & Company but rather a completely separate company.


Initially, the two firms shared the same offices and a similar approach to improving business operations. However, the two firms had put in place certain protections to avoid sharing information between the two companies and the Bain & Company executives had the ability to veto investments that posed potential conflicts of interest.[12] Bain Capital also provided an investment opportunity for partners of Bain & Company. Bain Capital's original $37 million fund was raised entirely from private individuals in mid-1984.[11] The firm initially gave a cut of its profits to Bain & Company, but Romney later persuaded Bain to give that up.[13]


Bain Capital - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Why doesn't anybody get that?

 

[Freewill]

Once again it is shown that the President and his organization is untruthful. What does that say about those who support his untruthfulness

Do Bain SEC documents suggest Mitt Romney is a criminal?

Do Bain SEC documents suggest Mitt Romney is a criminal? - The Washington Post

 

[Toro]

Do you take mortgage deductions? What about writing off charitable donations?

He took tax deductions available to him, just like everyone else does. Saying he shouldn't is like saying if liberals want the government to spend more, they should send money unto the Treasury and not force everyone else to pay more tax.

Romney was listed as the CEO but that doesn't mean he was actively involved. That may sound weird to people, but in financial industry general partnerships, that's not uncommon. Founders often receive compensation long after they've either left or are at the firm but aren't doing much productive. In limited liability corporations, people receive stock they hold on to and can sell at later times. In general partnerships in the financial industry, they usually don't.

My guess why he is reluctant to release his tax returns is because it will show that he used offshore tax structures to avoid - legally - paying taxes, maybe some that the IRS has since ruled against. The IRS used to allow carried interest held offshore to be deferred until brought onshore. They disallowed that in the mid-OOs. He probably also had some tax swaps which deferred paying taxes which he no longer uses. All that stuff used to be common.

Well, gee, so you support a guy who doesn't want to let the little people know how he gamed the system to not pay his fair share while they struggle to make ends meet.

This is the guy you support, someone who isn't being honest with us, pretty much.

(Waiting for Toro's usual whine about Mormons and hate.)

 

[CandySlice]

Well, gee, so you support a guy who doesn't want to let the little people know how he gamed the system to not pay his fair share while they struggle to make ends meet.

This is the guy you support, someone who isn't being honest with us, pretty much.

(Waiting for Toro's usual whine about Mormons and hate.)

I got a couple questions, Joe....

1.) How the hell is obeying the law 'gaming the system'?

2.) Can you define 'fair share' for me?

3.) What part of all of this is 'dishonest'?

1) Because most of us can't hire accountants to get us down to a 13% rate on our taxes, or park our money in Cayman Island Bank accounts.

2) At least as much as everyone else pays as a percentage, if not more. We have "top marginal rates" for a reason. The rich should pay more. Simple fairness and common sense. Otherwise, you eventually have a concentration of wealth at the top and that never ends well. (See also- France 1789, Russia 1917, Cuba 1959, Iran 1979 for further reference as to why this is really a bad thing.)

3) The "Dishonest Part" is the very fact he's hiding most of it. Honest would be, full disclosure, and if anyone has an issue with it, you should be able to justify it, preferably without sounding like a rich douchebag who thinks he's better than the rest of us.

Anybody can hire an accountant and why wouldn't you? Don't you WANT to get the money thats coming to you or would you rather just sit back and let the gov't run barefoot through your money?

 

[rightwinger]

Romney was listed as the CEO but that doesn't mean he was actively involved. That may sound weird to people, but in financial industry general partnerships, that's not uncommon. Founders often receive compensation long after they've either left or are at the firm but aren't doing much productive. In limited liability corporations, people receive stock they hold on to and can sell at later times. In general partnerships in the financial industry, they usually don't.

My guess why he is reluctant to release his tax returns is because it will show that he used offshore tax structures to avoid - legally - paying taxes, maybe some that the IRS has since ruled against. The IRS used to allow carried interest held offshore to be deferred until brought onshore. They disallowed that in the mid-OOs. He probably also had some tax swaps which deferred paying taxes which he no longer uses. All that stuff used to be common.

Dude. You don't own 100% of a company and then just go off and ignore it and not be concerned with the direction it takes or the profits it makes. You just don't.

That is true. Since Romney was working another job 12 hours a day, 6 days a week in another state FOR FREE, he turned the day to day operation over to a management team. That is what Romney did.

Romney could clear this all up simply by releasing his tax records and showing that he received no salary from Bain during those years.

Think how embarassed Obama would be

 

[onecut39]

Once again it is shown that the President and his organization is untruthful. What does that say about those who support his untruthfulness

Do Bain SEC documents suggest Mitt Romney is a criminal?

Do Bain SEC documents suggest Mitt Romney is a criminal? - The Washington Post

They suggest that he is a liar. A large one at that.

 

[Meister]

Once again it is shown that the President and his organization is untruthful. What does that say about those who support his untruthfulness

Do Bain SEC documents suggest Mitt Romney is a criminal?

Do Bain SEC documents suggest Mitt Romney is a criminal? - The Washington Post

They suggest that he is a liar. A large one at that.

Comprehension is not your friend, apparently.

 

[Article 15]

Mitt Romney handed 23 years of tax returns over to the McCain campaign when they vetted him for a spot on that ticket.

Why is Mitt Romney willing to disclose more information to people looking to hire him to be vice president than he is people looking to hire him to be president?